Mike Brookreson Found Bigfoot Hair?


We were pleasantly surprised to see that our friend Mike Brookreson has a YouTube channel. Mike is an avid Bigfoot Evidence reader, and as you can tell in this video, he's ready for The Falcon Project! We're looking forward to meeting up with Mike and the Falcon Project team in a couple of months. Check out this video to see what Mike has been doing and it looks like he found something very interesting:




Comments

  1. Replies
    1. Got monkey suit?

      Joe Iktomi

      Delete
    2. I would like to say, that this is a great collection of research by Mike B, and I congratulate him on his invitation to the Falcon Project!!

      Keep up the good work Mike!!

      Delete
    3. I will almost guarantee that any DNA result of this hair sample will come back as human. The experts will claim contamination due to the results. I believe many of the hair samples that have tested positive for human DNA in the past are legit. I think that the Sasquatch DNA so closely mirrors human that the results are essentially identical therefore rendering the test useless.

      Until an actual sample is taken from a living Sasquatch as the entire event is recorded with independent experts observing the entire collection process, there will always be reasonable doubt for skeptics.

      Just my 2 cents.

      Archer1

      Delete
    4. That's crossed my mind before now Archer1 xx

      Delete
    5. I really enjoyed that Mike!

      Delete
    6. Where the heck have you been Archer1?! Spot on bro... My sentiment precisely.

      Delete
    7. somtime tham mexicuns smellin lack tham bigfoots sos folk heers lookin reel clos fer tham animulls

      Delete
    8. U bein ans mexicuns ans all

      Delete
  2. Mike...is it a pube ? ..be honest now..!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You'd have to ask the owner Henrietta. Most Subjects I have had the pleasure of knowing surf Brazil.

      Delete
  3. Genuine question Mike, why did you not submit your hair samples to Sykes project for testing? I'm just curious ? Im sure he was 'footing' (pun intended hehe) the bill.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe these samples were attained prior to a time where Sykes was fitting the bill to test them. Sykes is still happy to test samples, however as he's forked out for this long, the submitters need to pay up.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for clarifying joe

      Delete
    3. I think Mike did not want to pay to have it done. Sykes had already done his study before Mike collected his I believe. Anyway Mike should be able to answer this. Now since Mike will be hooked up with Dr. Meldrum who is running his own hair sample study this may be accomplished in the future.

      Many times rock clacking has been associated with Sasquatches. If David Claerr is correct maybe some of these times they may be fashioning cutting stones. Interesting concept to say the least.

      Chuck

      Delete
    4. Chuck I'm sitting here with Louis picking guitar and having coffee. Bone tools or Lissoirs were used by Neandertals for all kinds of purposes from working animal skins to weapons to marrow and pulp extraction. As to your other point you are precisely correct. I don't want to pay for testing and with the half dozen researchers and the couple of books now in print I don't feel I should have to. I was going to fly that hair out to the Sasquatch Summit and hand it to JM personally but Claerr came back down that week. If JM or Barnes wants it it's theirs. There's no point in watching It biodegrade in plastic in my drawer. Chuck I absolutely love to find a well used fresh travel corridor and bait it with scent attractants. I do not believe those rock throwing incidents which do get spooky are mere happenstance. Hope you're well buddy. Take care of Louis while I'm gone. I think he's starting to get the Bigfoot bug.

      Delete
    5. If you are sure that it's Bigfoot hair (like you indicated in the video) it should be tested.

      Delete
    6. Agreed. Hence the gift to a person who intends to do just that.

      Delete
    7. Meldrum is currently accepting samples I hear.

      Delete
    8. Don my brother. I've got purported hair. And if he's in the market for hair he shall have it. Doctor Meldrum has done a great deal for this field. People used to talk about the Mount Rushmore of Bigfoot with Green and Dahinden and Byrne and the like, but they probably better save some room on the mountain for JDM. He's earned it, it's time.

      Delete
  4. Divorce coah

    Evidence kit and facts for parents in divorce on what is best for

    children to obtain equal custody in family court.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Preeti, what is an evidence kit in a domestic case and just how do these children obtain custody over their parents?

      Delete
  5. Mike is in mourning because his buddy Travis Barker and Bassist Mark Hoppus announced a split with Tom Delonge meaning no more BLINK 182 :(....he did unequivocally state, "I never conquered rarely came, tomorrow holds such better days, days when I still feel alive and I can't wait to get outside the world was wide, I was alive, the tour was over I survived and I can't wait to get back home, to pass the time in my room alone "

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brother I'm great. Mike is letting me stay at the condo while he's gone. I'm remodeling due to a flood, where someone left my water on, hey man, id like to meet you someday. Mike's having some researcher buddies down, for his birthday in March, he says to tell you hello and for you to get down here and meet the great Lupe Mendoza.

      Delete
    2. Hey man I gotta go, he's letting these rodeo girls stay over here and I may be keeping them up and I guess these barrel racers need their sleep. I look forward to meeting you man. He talks about you and that Joe dude from Wales all the time.

      Delete
    3. Well tell Mike I'll be over his neck of the woods to drink him and this "Joe" chap under the table sometime in the near future!! I hear they drink like pansies and sing like drowned rats in that country!!

      Delete
    4. Actually Mike's got a pretty good singing voice, I've let him sing with my band before, he sounds kind of like a cross between Fergie and Jesus. But I will relay the message. I knocked on his bedroom door but he said something about needing a tack room in the condo, to store his halters, bridles and saddle. Take Care Man!

      Delete
    5. My references to inferiority were aimed towards the Welsh, but HEY!! Take care brother!!

      Delete
    6. Iktomi is me, I got your message. You do need to come down here and enjoy the hospitality. Louis and I would be glad to have you.

      Delete
    7. Jesus, everyone is posting under a different name now.

      Delete
    8. ... I would to try Texas BBQ. I hear it's the best; predominantly beef down there?

      Delete
    9. Beef Brisket with pork baby back short ribs from Rudy's here in beautiful downtown San Antonio......delicious.

      Delete
    10. Hello Jesus at 4:12. I'm just too lazy to switch back over as Louis will be the predominant user of this device while I'm away anyway.

      Delete
    11. The first Rudy's I ate at was the one in New Braunsfels Mikey.
      Joe,it's damn good BBQ.
      But you have to drink an ice cold Lone Star Longneck when you eat it.
      Nothing but a heavenly great time.
      Mike H.

      Delete
    12. Texas is to BBQ as Somalia is to Ice Cream. They need to get up here to Kansas City for some lessons on the subject. #1. Ditch the mesquite. It's only marginally better than old railroad ties.

      Delete
    13. If you think Texas BBQ is bad there is something very wrong with you. People may have favorites, but there is no bad BBQ among the regional variations. Bad examples sure, but no bad BBQ as a whole.

      Delete
    14. And we are suppose to take this guy serious

      Delete
    15. So where are you pretending to be from now iktomi?

      Delete
    16. ^^^Compared to K.C. Texas BBQ is awful. To them black pepper is an exotic spice.

      Delete
    17. Man Nadboy,what a man crush.

      Delete
    18. Whenever you have to drown brisket in KC Masterpiece u know that shit is dog food.KC barbecue is Alpo.

      Delete
    19. K.C Masterpiece is what we give to the tourists. Ever hear of Gates or Arthur Bryants? Hell, one of our joints was voted the best in the country by Zagats. And it's in a damn gas station.

      Delete
    20. Ok--let's just get down to it. Rendezvous ribs in beautiful downtown Memphis Tennessee is the best of all time!

      Delete
    21. Nope never heard of them from here in New Jersey.But if you're saying that barbecue from a gas was voted one of the best then that says it all right there.Zagats has no sense of taste buds.Hell,they say McDonald's is one of the best fast-food in the nation.

      Delete
    22. Of course BBQ is a personal taste and arguing over the best is like debating what the best color is, but I have lived and experienced BBQ extensively in Memphis, Texas, Kansas City and the Carolinas. It's all very good, but for me, Texas is king hands-down. (And I'm not from Texas.) Like they say there, it is so good it does not have to be drowned in sauce and is actually better without it.

      I used to be a die-hard Memphis fan, but Texas won me over eventually. KC is a close second with Memphis now for me.

      Carolina style is good if you never been to Texas, Memphis or KC.

      Delete
    23. ^^That gas station BBQ was called Oklahoma Joes. They've recently changed their name to Joes Kansas City. And they are as good as they're reputation. They have been featured on many TV shows about BBQ. And Gates and Sons and Arthur Bryants are legends. All three are worth a visit. And if they don't satisfy you, there are about a hundred more to try.

      Delete
    24. There's a place in Missouri called Strawberries. They now have a sauce and dry rub that's dry but vinegar based. Man now I'm just hungry.

      Delete
    25. I've been to Oklahoma Joe's and it was great. I didn't know about the name change. I still think the BBQ in Texas is best overall.

      Delete
    26. I haven't tried those BBQ places in other states. I have tried many BBQ places in TX and Rudys is the BOSS hands down. So good my taste buds don't ever want to roam. Damn, I guess I know what I am having for dinner tonight. Who brought this up?

      Delete
    27. Louis stays hungry Chick. I think it's called the munchies.

      Delete
    28. Hands down the best BBQ is the stuff I make on Sundays, now known as family and BBQ. But what the hell do I know.
      Chuck

      Delete
    29. More than most and enough for me any day of the week. I'll have 2 sides to go !

      Delete
    30. In K.C. you're not allowed to vote unless you have at least 2 smokers and can make a rub without referring to a recipe. As it should be.

      Delete
    31. The Salt Lick in Round Rock,Tx off of E Palm Valley Blvd has some of the best.
      As a matter of fact the Wife and I are going to the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo World Championship BBQ Cook Off tonight.
      I'm going to get PHAT tonight.
      And maybe a little beer might be in my future.
      I'll be thinking of y'all.
      Mike H.

      Delete
    32. And now the jealousy ...... Have fun brother !

      Delete
  6. Sykes found nothing.
    Referring to skeptics, months ago Joe "Iktomi" Fitzgerald was all like "wait for Sykes" and "Sykes will prove you're wrong" etc.
    Well, Sykes has got nothing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yet he's still accepting samples, and his associates are conducting a hybrid study.

      I'm sure this "Joe" chap would reiterate that patience is required.

      Delete
    2. Patience? What, another 10 years?

      Delete
    3. In all reality, it could genuinely be a matter of a year or two.

      But I'm not going anywhere, and you'll hear about it when I do.

      Delete
    4. Joe just admit you are wrong. Bigfoot don't exist.

      Delete
    5. I'll admit that I occasionally stoop to a level way beneath me in responding to you... I'll admit that.

      Delete
  7. Morning folks.

    Our midweek predictions were spot on!

    Total number of bigfoots this week: zero.

    That brings the grand total number of bigfoots to zero.

    Plotting the data on a graph seems to reveal a very telling trend.

    Ciao

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In July 1975, The Washington Star-News report:
      Though conceding that his existence is "hotly disputed," the Army Corps of Engineers has officially recognized Sasquatch, the elusive and supposed legendary creature of the Pacific Northwest mountains. Also known as Big Foot, Sasquatch is described in the just-published "Washington Environmental Atlas" as standing as tall as 12 feet and weighing as much as half a ton, covered with long hair except for face and hands, and having "a distinctive human-like form." The atlas, which cost $200,000 to put out, offers a map pin pointing all known reports of Sasquatch sightings, and notes that a sample of reputed Sasquatch hair was analyzed by the FBI and found to belong to no known animal.

      Ciao Bella!

      Delete
    2. Well if it was in '75 I see it gained a lot of traction in the last 40 years. /sarcasm

      Delete
    3. The point is, you have a government acknowledgement of the creature commonly knows as Bigfoot (I really don't like using that word).

      Delete
    4. Chucks total is 100k and growing by the day. Yes the eating is good in NA right now, and spring be popping soon, I hope.
      Chuck

      Delete
    5. Are there any newer versions of this atlss? Does the ACoE officially recognize bigfoot today as a scientifically verified organism? Are there other government agencies that confirm bigfoots existence?

      Delete
    6. Not since 1975 it seems... Plenty of scientists who endorse the idea, some which are the very best in their respected fields.

      Delete
    7. Not exactly a ringing endorsement by the US government.

      Delete
    8. What, a published atlas via $200,000 of tax payers' money, even outlining what's to do in the event of an encounter, describing investigative measures by the FBI that yielded biological evidence attributed to Sasquatch?

      Not a "glass half full" type of guy, are you?

      Delete
    9. Put your little boner back in your filthy Welsh underpants - what you're citing is a newspaper article reporting on a "publication" that includes a reference to a "study" that supposedly occurred. That's at least three levels of hearsay. And all of this allegedly occurred 40 years ago.

      Delete
    10. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Xv4cBzCaC6w/TqwtukR9tFI/AAAAAAAAAMs/2iC5mSZMNH0/s1600/sasquatchpage.pn

      ... One can spot Daniel Campbell's sewer mouthed hate speech a mile off.

      Delete
    11. Yep ,that's Nadboy alright.

      Delete
    12. Your link only shows a map of reported bigfoot sightings, not a "recognition of the species" as you declared (with typical hyperbole). Also, other than a caption added at the bottom right (which is not part of the original publication) there is no indication of the source of the document (so I guess we can add another level of hearsay).

      Delete
    13. (Sigh)

      That would be because it is one part of it. And even if it wasn't, wouldn't sightings published by the army core of engineers be just the same? The Army Atlas and other information relative to the FBI was obtained by Jody Cook under the Freedom of Information-Privacy Act. Jody wrote to the FBI and requested all information relative to Bigfoot. This is old news, the link shows an actual copy.

      ... Yes... I just pull the other arm from behind my back every time, don't I?

      Delete
    14. A map with alleged sightings (with absolutely no analysis of the circumstances of the sightings) constitutes recognition of a species? That's really what you're asserting?

      Delete
    15. You suddenly require analysis of the reports now? I thought there were no genuine circumstances for Sasquatch sightings... Why are they a requirement now suddenly? It's an atlas, not a sightings database, where would they have room for such details?

      Stop trying so hard.

      Delete
    16. I agree, I was being quite naïve in expecting "analysis." I apologize for my error.

      Delete
    17. I wouldn't call expecting an atlas to steer from it's purpose, as "naive".

      Delete
    18. That should be "its purpose." "It's" is a contraction of "It is."

      And yes, that would obviously involve too much work to include a bare citation for the source of the sightings and prints. After all, as you claim, the "atlas" cost $200,000 to produce in 1975.

      Delete
    19. Oh, it's a shame you couldn't invest so much attention to detail in YOUR claims, eh?

      Not my claim by the way... Fact via the freedom of information act.

      Delete
    20. I'm not "claiming" anything. You declared that bigfoot was recognized as a species by some obscure government publication and I just systematically destroyed your absurd contention.

      Delete
    21. Oh dear... Ummmmm... How did you go about this again? By requesting every sighting pin on a map be "analysed" in an atlas?

      How embarrassing.

      Delete
    22. I guess including a footnote (that's yokel speak for citation), referring to the source of the information was not included in the $200,000 budget. Another example of government inefficiency!

      Delete
    23. You'd like footnotes in an atlas now, not just purpose steering analysis'? Moving the goal posts and spell corrections... Anyone would think we were reading the failures of Dmaker?

      The source of the information would be the apparent understanding of the army core of engineers... It's just a little hint.

      Delete
    24. That would be "army corps of engineers" (unless you really meant "core" as in a central group of key figures).

      I guess we will just have to accept that every sighting and track on the map was confirmed as authentic and we cannot be suspicious of the government (like we are in every single other case -- Smithsonian, Department of Interior, National Park Service, etc . . .). In this case, the government has an "apparent understanding" and I will have blind faith without questioning its sources.

      Delete
    25. LOL, I swear Iktomi, you are just like this other guy that used to come around here before he got ran off. Old Joe used to make substantial claims like this. And then someone would come along with probably nothing more than a high school education and absolutely destroy his claim and make him look like a fool. Just like is happening to you right now. You know what you need, you need Vegas the dog to chime in with one of his "You're owning them bro!!!" comments. Otherwise you're probably going to run off and hide like that little bitch Joe did.

      Delete
    26. Keep train of thought, old boy. The army engineers are professional people, why not trust them? What's supsicious is then having to use a freedom of information act to attain such an insight... They ultimately answer to the government, do they not? Shall I list you the instances where the US government have been found to be covering up the actions of the army, by journalists? The army would have the apparent understanding, whether it sees the light of day would be a decision far higher up... All very, very simple logic once you drop the emphasis on spell check and apply some common sense.

      Requiring footnotes and analysis' for every pins on an atlas is destroying what exactly?

      (Cringe)

      Delete
    27. That's new one -- someone submitting a FOIA request for a 40 year old, obscure Army publication and then actually receiving the publication is evidence of a conspiracy and government cover up!!!

      Delete
    28. Have you ever had to mitigate a dredge and fill for The Army Corp of Engineers DSA ? They are a ruthless speculative witch hunting lot that will bleed your account dry and call it conservation even if you are benefitting the local environment by creating a beautiful lake full of giant bass and crappie to fry. :). They are storm troopers in khaki. Beware their leader, he's the grand Moff Tarkin guy with the calculator. Please do not be so quick as to canonize them or think that they and their DOC enforcement arm won't look you in the eye and tell you a whopper with cheese.

      Delete
    29. 10:32... Well isn't that just the beauty of the freedom of information act? Wonderful things...

      Delete
    30. And no... 10:32... The evidence would have been shelving $200,000 of tax payers' money... Only for a usually very reliable legal procedure that the government is obligated to follow to release it.

      Delete
    31. ^ smoked as a kipper...`cept less tasty.

      Delete
  8. Looks like you got the goods on the Bigfoot Mikey.
    Good luck on the Falcon Project.
    Mike H.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Mike. They don't seem to want to step out and say cheese. But I'll keep trying. ;). M

      Delete
  9. Did you ever notice that after 50 years of people looking for bigfoot, they still don't exist?

    Did you ever notice that for decades there have been hundreds if not thousands of bigfoot hoaxes?

    Did you ever notice that Joe still acts as if we don't know that he is now using the name Iktomi?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think he is seriously denying to be Joe. For whatever reason he decided to switch to this name- I don't really care at this point. I don't think most do either.

      Delete
    2. "I want attention"... Did anyone get anything else from 5:09's comment?

      Delete
    3. LOL Jackass. As if someone posting as anonymous is going to get attention.

      Delete
    4. As Joe Iktomi would claim, "Plenty found (with grainy, out of focus film and video of amorphous blobs) and none captured (no explanation on how there could be so many hundreds of thousands of sightings without someone securing a specimen)."

      Delete
    5. 6:54... Attention, attention, attention.

      7:06... Your dribble flies in the face of every formerly considered cryptid, not o mention a negative proof logical fallacy.

      Nothing blobby about this;

      http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Munns-%20Meldrum%20Final%20draft.pdf

      Delete
    6. Whatever bizarre fantasy anyone can dream up is automatically to be considered legitimate, because of the "negative proof fallacy." Lazy application of a rhetorical "law" makes the contention absolutely immune from criticism and absolves a proponent from explaining a glaringly impossible situation. I understand now.

      Delete
    7. No... The negative proof fallacy is in fact a very real logical fallacy. In fact... "Rhetorical law" would be to maintain this fallacy in support of giving off the impression of legitimate debate, and is in fact one major indication of denial. This means that to use the negative proof fallacy, and maintain that it is warranted in any debate situation is in fact special pleading, and is not a criticism that adheres to logical principles, especially when we have examples of formerly considered cryptids being confirmed with next to no physical evidence when compared to this subject... This therefore eradicates any notion of "impossibility", and kind of makes you look silly.

      Delete
    8. The "negative proof fallacy" is present when someone posits that the lack of proof of something absolutely disproves its existence. I am open to any evidence of bigfoot and will view it critically. By pointing out the lack of a specimen, I am not claiming that it absolutely disproves bigfoot. I am simply observing that, with so many damn sightings, foot prints, sounds, and other "evidence," it is extremely strange that a specimen has not been secured. The fact that you incorrectly rely upon a rhetorical device to ignore the issue is noteworthy of course..

      Delete
    9. The negative proof fallacy actually works both ways of the argument. The concern about a lack of type specimen is rather valid, but if Sasquatch bury their dead (which the data does indeed point to being the case), then considering the US is covered 70% of wilderness, such burial areas could be extremely difficult to locate. So in this sense, your "rhetoricals" are in fact plausible explanations based on a comcusive means of research that simply might not have been reached yet. Research does not start at conclusion.

      Argh... But this was not your sentiment though, was it? You used words like "impossible" until such fallacies were pointed out.

      Delete
    10. Is the "data" that points to bigfoot burying their dead simply the fact that no bigfoot bodies have been found? That's circular reasoning at its finest.

      Humor me, do they "bury their dead" using their bare hands or do they use tools? If they use tools, where are they? Do they bury the tools as well or are they scavenged by porcupines like bigfoot bones are?

      Delete
    11. No... The data is in fact native legends that have actual science journals corroborating giant human skeletal finds. Your "circular reasoning" is in fact your naivety regarding this data. If these are hominids, which is likely to be the case if anything, then they could quite easily have culture and are likely to, considering they appear to have language (transcribed from a published piece of audio by the University of Wyoming).

      Humour you? I'll educate you... If you actually took time to watch the video up top, you have one example of tools being fashioned. As for burial method, it's difficult to say, but you only had to actually take the time to look at the data, before coming across so ignorant... Something your theory group appear to have a taste for.

      Delete
    12. Oh yeah, the grandiose "Smithsonian Institute" conspiracy theory. It's funny how one side of your brain believes that the federal government is perpetrating a massive cover up of bigfoot, but the other side of your brain seems to think that the same federal government publishes an "atlas" (as you call it) which openly admits to the existence of bigfoot!

      Delete
    13. It's not a conspiracy when you have it set as a rule and published that way.

      I might add... That there had to be a freedom of information act to attain the information on the atlas. Reading isn't your forte, is it?

      Delete
    14. Oh darn, the all powerful government conspiracy couldn't overcome the pesky Freedom of Information Act -- foiled again!

      Delete
    15. It appears it couldn't in this instance... There are other examples where it's failed however. No bigger conspiracy than ten thousand years of gorilla suit wearing chronies running around saying "boo" to people, trying to steal all their money... Right?

      Delete
    16. I can picture the conspirators sitting in their secret Bilderberg headquarters, smoking Cuban cigars and sipping fine brandy, baffled as to what to do with a FOIA request! They certainly cannot bury the "Atlas" (like they apparently did with the skeletons). No, the only choice is to respond to the request by sending out the Atlas and exposing their nefarious crimes! No other choice right?

      Delete
    17. ^^ LOL. Don't introduce too much logic. Joe's head is likely to split apart.

      Delete
    18. Like is said... It's not a conspiracy when you have it set by the anthroplogical authority as the rule. It might be news to you, but the Smithsonian is sometimes referred to as "the nation's attic"for its holdings of 138 million items, the Institution's Washington, D.C., nucleus of nineteen museums, nine research centres, and zoo, many of them historical or architectural landmarks, is the largest such complex in the world. Additional facilities are located in Arizona, Maryland, New York City, Virginia, Panama and elsewhere, and 168 other museums are Smithsonian affiliates... Could be anywhere!!

      I applaud your cynicism... But ultimately your acrobatics don't really come to terms with what's fact. The atlas was drawn up by the army and it required a freedom of information act to attain. Why? You'll have to wrote an inquisative email to those manaiacally laughing scoundrels.

      Get busy.

      Delete
    19. So instead of having an orderly procedure through which citizens submit a request for government documents and other information in writing to a designated agency, the federal government should open its doors and allow every bird brained cryptozoologist and disturbed conspiracy obsessed fruitcake to rifle through its records and have free reign to take whatever they want. And the fact that they don't permit such access is extremely suspicious and evidence of a cover up!

      Delete
    20. An "orderly procedure through which citizens submit a request for government documents in writing to the federal government" is precisely what applied to the scenario up top and worked? Are you losing your train of thought again?? I think you'll be hard pushed to find an example of anyone assuming they could waltz into anywhere of the sort and expect to rummage through filing cabinets and things of that nature... Don't think you'll find anyone ignorant enough to think they could. The "cover up" would be the fact that $200,000 of tax payers' money was shelved, requiring a freedom of information act to get it released?

      (Duh?)

      So many insults, are you angry my any chance??

      Delete
    21. No. They shouldn't. Then again they shouldn't co-op some DOI-Homeland Security ex military types to show up and pull the bad cop worse cop routine on honest witnesses when a possible incident has occurred. I believe Wes Germer and Bob Garrett and Jevning are telling the truth about what happened in East Texas. My own private research group and my buddies in the field joined Bob in the area not long after the now highly touted incidents took place., and since we had no way to corroborate it, no Mr Black, with encrypted emails And since all Bob asked of the group was not to discuss it as his family, and freedom were still in issue, we sat on it. Until Wes Geemer and Will J. came along and filled in the holes and corroborated and pretty much blew the lid off the whole thing. It's as disturbing a cover up attempt and a startling revelation as you'll find in the field and for the fellow who mentioned Paulides below, you were, in many ways correct. David sniffed them out too. He's just letting you decide the facts. And I had them come in on me after I sent them some photos of a mutilated deer that resulted in them setting live bear cage traps all over my site as if what mauled the deer was a black bear. The real intended result was to kill the investigation and it worked like a charm.

      Delete
    22. You wrote that the FOIA request procedure worked as the government system intended, but then you claim that, because the system was used at all, that is "suspicious" and evidence of a government cover up. Which is it? Or do you get to have it both ways, because, well that is just bigfoot logic?

      Delete
    23. Well Mike they used the second stage more passive route on you. There are 3 to 4 stages. Stage one is disinformation to get you off the trail like they did to the farmer in New Lebanon, Oh that I talked with last Memorial day. Second is the good cop, bad cop routine to intimidate you and bad cop Gary Callahan from Dixon Montana , yes Gary some of us know who you are and work for. Putting out those bear traps to stop you was a stage two on MIKE. Stage three is what has and is going on with Bob Garrett right now.
      Stage four, this is where you kiss you ass good bye and there is no trail.
      Chuck

      Delete
    24. Suspicious would be shelving $200,000 of tax payers' money... Only for a usually very reliable legal procedure that the government is obligated to follow to release it.

      No... The FOIA worked like the government were obliged by, their intent was pretty obvious... And around and around and around we go, weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee... !!!

      Delete
    25. Oh wait, I think I understand your "logic" -- the US Army put together this "Bigfoot Atlas" in 1975, because they knew that bigfoot existed and they wanted to warn their engineers or whatever. Naturally, the government conspirators (who didn't want the world to know about bigfoot for some unexplained reason) did not like this and buried it (I suppose if they were honest folk, they would have published the "Atlas" in the New York Times). Anyway, there were no subsequent editions of the "Bigfoot Atlas" because the evil government was heavily engaged in covering up bigfoot. But copies of the 1975 "Bigfoot Atlas" were still sitting in storage someplace and, some 40 years later, an intrepid footer managed to figure out the well known FOIA process and submit a request. The government, which supposedly went to so much effort to criminally cover up the "Bigfoot Atlas" (and who you would think would do everything possible to resist the request, destroy the "Atlas," or engage in some other immoral obfuscation to deny the release) just simply sent the "Bigfoot Atlas" to the footer with no resistance. Such an effective cover up they have established! That scenario makes complete sense to me!

      Delete
    26. Chuck what you just typed is pretty shocking stuff and I've learned more today than all my years here. I really need to thank everyone again. This has been and is one of the best threads on Bigfoot phenomenon I've ever read. They really did try to shut Bob down. And whomever survived that incident, I cannot fathom their suffering. Six months in the remote interior surrounded by brown bear and wolves and lion may be enough to do the job without them ever needig to stage me at all. They can sit back and relax and let nature take it's course. .

      Delete
    27. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    28. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  10. annnnnnnnnnn the search for hard/concrete evidence for Sasquatch goes on and on and on and on annnnnnnnnnnnn on..............

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm glad you typed that. I agree. If I can't locate it corroborating with a team and technology I'll probably say god bless. In fact DSA, 2015 will be my last attempt at researching this subject matter if no serious results are forthcoming. Thank you for your humorous honesty and know that I agree.

      Delete
  11. I have a good amount of hair, that was on the end of a 3 foot stick, that was thrown at a skeptic's head, would have probably killed him if it hit him. Happened outside his house at 2am when he went out to get his tea out of his truck. He went out next morning and looked at the stick, saw a bunch of hair. He touched it and said he could not get the oil off his fingers for 3 days and he even used gasoline! They wanted $6000 to test the hair, and I'm not going to waste my $ having it come back "Unknown" This skeptic will be with me at Cabellas, firm believer now! He's had several experiences in his yard since then. I'll probably just give them to Dr. Meldrum.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. People will scream that there's no physical evidence. Then if you get them some, well it wasn't taken "from a Sasquatch ". Someone is going to have to hit one with a specimen dart. I promise you this. I can get close enough to do this. But I need a dart man and probably armed backup on me. For my safety ;).......

      Delete
    2. for sure hunters in this area say that they have seen a bigfoot swear these creature travel in groups, so if you take one down iam thinking all hell will break out!!!!

      Delete
    3. And I am thinking you are right and I am further thinking that sometimes you don't even have to take one down and the fit hits the sham!!

      Delete
    4. Yes, so? I carry a Weatherby 7mm Mag with a fine Shepard scope set out to 500yards. Anyone with a some what steady hand, could shoot repeated shots into a circle the size of a half dollar. 7 shots plus an ammo pouch with 3 full clips ready to reload. What's all this fear about, put 165grns of lead in his eye at 2900 ft per second, He bites the dust. Nothing is going to get up from a well placed shot. That's what hunters do, along with many other trained shooters. Show me one, I'll show you One BF with an extra whole in his hairy head.

      Delete
    5. Are you being serious about getting that close MNL? If so, what State are you in, and why no video?

      Delete
    6. I'm always serious. I'll get as close as I can, and I'll make the shot, and it will be dead end of story. You mean you wouldn't approach one with the same weapon on your shoulder? I killed my first bear with a 22 hornet, nearly ruined the head with the exit wound. I did hit the eye, but the thick skull didn't stop the round. 22hornet 90grns 1950ft per second 388 pound boar black bear 116 yards moving target, 28 degree temp. If these things bleed, they aren't bullet proof people.

      Delete
    7. So what State, and why no video?

      Delete
    8. 9:08 you're correct. Listen, there are quite a few witnesses to an incident on Lonsdale's property in Louisiana at "monster central" where as a precursor to "killing bigfoot" the GCBRO put some buck shot in the belly of one. I think even MK Davis may have tried to humanely assist in tracking it. Any hunter knows that putting a bullet in something isn't the end game. You have to track it and recover it. And therein lies the rub. But those guys are on a mission and they will not be deterred. I am too. But we are taking different paths to the laboratory as I cannot reconcile the blood lust necessary to put one in the crosshairs. That being said I've moved past judging those that do and have, for though I'm not strapped I'm an outlaw footer by the strictest of definitions. .

      Delete
    9. Hey DS. MNL is MIKE, having some fun today, but when does he not.

      And you talked about the oil on the stick. I have some oil at the top of my window outside my bedroom after someone knocked on my window NOV of 2013. It is the size of about 3 of my finger tips and rain has not washed it off.
      Chuck

      Delete
    10. Look into the red swollen glassy eyes of Louis and despair! Yep. Tis me ....Louis is here if you need him, and by here, of course, I mean physically available. ;)

      Delete
    11. DS. I'm here. And why no video you ask? I'm in the State of Texas, home of tight jeans and hot beans. And as to video here's the scoop, "they only come out at night (real close) the lean and hungry type, they're deadly man and they can really rip your world apart, and money's the matter, you better have the proper scope and man you better have a dart" There's only one person I know who actually owns the exact rig I'm referencing, ladies and gentlemen for your all your darting needs I present, Mr Stacy Brown. Now, you ask about video. Here's the deal. I have never gone out once with thermal. If Lupe brings a good FLIR, I'll give you guys a truly cool Easter surprise.

      Delete
  12. I have no idea from what lint catcher this hair came from, nor do I care. No person or agency can claim that an identification has ever been made that proclaims a species on the North American continent unknown to science. This is all a fairy tale. Sykes has already taken down the "BEST DNA EVIDENCE". Why bother arguing about this dead issue. Bigfoot is not and probably never will be proven by objective accepted science, Fact. Footers, try again, find a body, get something new to taunt as proof. Patty is good, but it's an almost 50 year old film that contains something most REAL scientist can't agree on. Face reality, face real facts, and continue if you must.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. anon 8:48,Now that is the kind of well thought out and executed argument we expect from the bf com. You must be one of the leading expert researchers.

      Delete
    2. Do your research 843. You really believe that evidence was the best. You better talk to Moneymaker. You could talk to just about any submitter on too of that. What did they do during the vetting process that shocked all the submitters (hint they may have excluded potential morphological unknowns right out of the gate and anything that looked remotely human). Strike one. Then they tied themselves to a TV program and television reveal next creating artificial deadlines and pay for sensationalism mentality. Strike Two. Then they embarrassed submitters on TV chilling any further submissions. Strike 3. I haven't given up on Sykes. But I was too late for that ship and lord knows I'm glad. The final chapter of the final book has yet to be written on this matter. For better or worse I am resigned to that fact.

      Delete
    3. He talks more sense than most people on here.
      Bigfoot is real.

      Delete
    4. "I have no idea from what lint catcher this hair came from, nor do I care. No person or agency can claim that an identification has ever been made that proclaims a species on the North American continent unknown to science."

      ... Actually, Dr Paul Fuerst of Ohio State University & the Oregon Regional Primate Research Centre have. The hairs were collected by forest rangers at a sighting where tracks were accumulated too. Dr Frank Poirier, chairman of the Ohio State's department of anthropology confirms this.

      You hope a lot... Those are the only facts.

      Delete
    5. Mike Mike, you saying that it wasn't the best? Ok BF is real, you bfooters can't get the real scientific world to accept this. Then along comes a super well known and respected Dr, SYKES, He says openly, send your samples, I will help you prove your beliefs. I'm going to announce these result on TV so the world will know and accept. Your researchers, you, didn't send the BEST? are you joking? You sent what you had, now it's not the real good stuff right. What are you waiting for? Sykes is still alive and working. If you truly have something yourself, that wasn't sent for whatever reason, I apologize for the "you" in this remark, it's meant to the com as a whole. Send your best to someone right away, maybe best to exclude yourself from the crowd. SEND IT NOW mike.. the world is ready and waiting.

      Delete
    6. The best was sent in, and he announced he had the goods.....THEN WHAT HAPPENED?? TOTAL COVER UP!

      Delete
    7. Specifically, I'm waiting on Dr Jeff Meldrum to accept my sample so the lab can say to me "and the envelope please.....and now, for best supporting researcher in a limited role, your winner, the nature boy, MKB...."

      Delete
    8. Go ahead and write us another book Iktomi Joe, scream it to the world, Still no facts accepted by main stream science, still no body of evidence considered studied and accepted. You and I both know this is the FACTS. Until the world has PROOF, your howling YOUR opinion" like BOBO howls at the BF into the emptiness of space. evidence to you, good enough for you, proves something to you! OK Joe we believe you believe, nobody doubts your belief in BF. The world needs a little more REAL proof, and all your expansive theories and articles sighting certain individual beliefs won't change a thing. REAL 100% scientifically proven evidence is needed for the rest of the world. If no other evidence is available, just keep howling and writing, I guess.

      Delete
    9. I have no idea DS, What happened? did Sykes kill Kennedy? Oh your saying this well respected gentlemen, who offered to help YOU the BF com, prove your evidence is real, is a lying stealing HOAXER!. I think you have confused SYKES with DYER, or some of the other well known BF researcher trackers, catchers, whatever. Now just think for a moment about what you are saying, and more important, what and who you are accusing. This will certainly make other well known scientist jump at the chance to help you, the BF com, prove your evidence and point. Think DS.

      Delete
    10. We have all the proof we need, it's the real of you that need proof, those who never step foot in the woods. Mike had an awesome video above, with breaks, prints, hair, vocals, pebbles thrown. A body is coming, but the proof is overwhelming!

      Delete
    11. Facts are, we have he hair fibres of an unknown primate. The world's scientists can do what ever they like, biological sign of a bipedal primate in the US we still have... And you learned something else today. A lack of body, or any rhetorical, agenda ridden safety net argument doesn't make that, or the opinion of people far more educated and qualified than you go away.

      Nobody is claiming to have proofs, just the evidence for an unknown primate.

      Ya welcome!

      Delete
    12. 936 I never said "Lying, Stealing Hoaxer" C'mon now, don't put wordS in my mouth!
      He was silenced from letting the public know the truth...PERIOD!

      Delete
    13. DS, we are big boy's. If you SAY Sykes offered to show the truth and change nothing which he did, but he then showed something totally untrue while hiding, destroying misplacing the real facts, YOU called him a lying stealing hoaxer. If you believe this, claim it, that's your right. Personally, I think that makes 0 sense. Why would this man do such a thing?

      Delete
    14. Iktomi, DS, and all BF believers, If your absolutely sure about Your facts, and that there is this beast out there, you've proven it to yourselves beyond doubt, why all the searching? why all the finding BF's? why send anything else to scientist? If your sure about it, and you conclude the rest of the world just can't see what's so clean cut to you, why look or argue anymore? The Government is silencing people and the truth is already out there, why continue with things like Falcon? You already know what the world needs to believe, and you can't get it because of the Gov, why continue? But you already know it's real, so when you go out searching for proof, who's it for? You've already given us all the proof YOU needed, who's this new proof for? is it for me, or could it possibly for YOU?

      Delete
    15. Why all the searching? Because according to you, science is still laughing? It requires "proof"? Are you losing your train of thought there, old boy? Your query is in fact more relevant to your position... If Sasquatch doesn't exist and you are sure about that, spending your time trying to convince people here is not the actions of someone confident or contended for that matter.

      Delete
    16. Who are you anon 10:02. OMG, You know it's real, you have the proof, we are all idiots that can't accept this great knowledge, then who is needing all this new research? Why are you still talking about more proof? You already believe, we don't believe, you don't care who believes, so who are you collecting your proof for? What perception anon, you've just cracked the code.

      Delete
    17. Oh... And like any field of scientific research, in this case anthropological, it's standard practice to follow it through. Suggesting that people refrain from following scientific protocol and not attempt to reach a conclusive means sounds like you have something to fear, and something to try and convince people against pursuing.

      Delete
    18. But you already Know the truth Iktomi, right. You disagree with the scientist. Why do you still argue with those who don't have you insight? What you claim as facts are your own, why do I need to accept them, or science for that matter? You already have your evidence right? just because most of the world and science don't agree, you still believe, right? Who needs more proof? I'm only going to believe when science, main stream science accepts, so why argue the same points with either of us? You believe, we don't. Don't need to bring anymore video's or hair samples or sighting reports to science, they've rejected for the most part the entire argument as have I and most people. No more argument about the same stuff will help a thing. I'd just be content with your own knowledge and belief, those on the fence and non believers got Money Faker and crew.

      Delete
    19. There needs to be a body, and better video evidence, for the skeptics to be happy. It's a fact that there isn't enough concrete proof for the skeptics, or there wouldn't be skeptics. The proof seems to be suppressed, every time it's about to hut mainstream.

      Delete
    20. Not scared, tired and bored, Your not an Anthropologist, the good ones do what they do and argue nothing, the facts speak for themselves. Bring a body home from your next adventure, or tell us where to go when someone does OK. That's when I will believe, and you can finally be a real KNOWER.

      Delete
    21. DS, you are way to intelligent, and I mean that, to buy that story. You are one of the most practical of believer researchers, you know what is needed to bring this story to the forefront of scientific review. The world would revel in this discovery, I would too!. Don't get yourself pulled into all the theories and stories, some are just not true and I believe you already know this. I've watched your posts and I believe your sincerity, search for proof as a believer, don't debate as a knower and a theorist. YOU are to intelligent to run with the wacky crowd, just do your own thing, and you will be respected regardless of success in the field.

      Delete
    22. Whose to say whether they will try a DNA extraction through these scientific studies. I'm on board for the long haul as clearly "I science ". ;)

      Delete
    23. 10:22... You come across slightly unhinged? I in fact agree with scientists, the best in their respected fields in fact that have taken the time to look at the evidence... It's their insight, not mine. In trying to present your claim that we aren't so sure of ourselves, you are in fact coming across naive to the requirements of science. Would you like this explained to you? Science hasn't rejected anything, it is not a freethinking entity. Scienists are awaiting a type specimen, but your ignorance is kind of put into context, not to mention your entire argument's frailties, when science has been used to verify the evidence for an unknown primate... You still need the primate to prove anything, but you still have that little headache. No "you have your opinion and I have mine" nonsense really helps your case in the face of scientific facts... This is why I have enthusiasm to pursue running your nose in it. If it didn't exist, we wouldn't have sign and as long as there's sign... I can eventually rub your nose in it.

      Delete
    24. So Iktomi, you need more proof because science and I are still laughing. First I'm not laughing, I just reject your evidence. Second, I have no reason to believe the unbelievable without positive proof, acceptable by all. third, If You already Know, why do you care who's laughing?, wouldn't that make the laughing the fools? Your positive it's real, right? that puts you in a unique position as a knower.. You shouldn't waste your time with nonbelievers, shouldn't you be out in the field using your special knowledge to obtain actual proof? wouldn't that progress your position best? That's what Meldrum does, and he's just a believer.

      Delete
    25. I'm unhinged, you tend to use that word a little often. Why are you, the knower explaining science to someone who agrees with science, the main stream kind. I don't need a lesson from a layman about what scientist do. Give that sermon to the 3rd grade science class. If you want to cut through all the so called nonsense on my part, go to work, your the knower. Shouldn't be hard for you to prove what you already know, should it? Get out there and argue with a video camera or cast some plaster, find some hair samples or something. You as the absolute knower have a responsibility to all those believers trudging around the country doing all the work you misrepresent. Show those poor uneducated hard working researchers how to get it done IKTOMI. Then maybe you can understand better what your actually trying so hard to make real. The Mountain Gorilla was a legend until someone actually went and proved it (GOT ONE). Go Iktomi, and get your own APE, You KNOW HE's OUT THERE, don't you?

      Delete
    26. Thanks a lot 1039! I'm all by myself and frankly I don't trust anyone else.

      Delete
    27. No... I need "proof" because a conclusion is the focus of any long term field of research. Rejecting my evidence is fine, having a scientific means to show that; another. Not believing something you haven't seen yourself is fine... Ignoring evidence that renders people warranted to invest enthusiasm and a scienific conclusion, is agenda ridden. I don't care about "who's laughing", I care because I adhere to the requiements of anthropological science. I must say... I am quite amazed my the audacity of your comment? Your positive it's not real, right? that puts you in a contented position... You shouldn't waste your time with "believers", shouldn't you be out doing soenthing else with your time? You are here remember, on what level of narcissism you're at is anyone's guess.

      "You shouldn't waste your time with nonbelievers, shouldn't you be out in the field using your special knowledge to obtain actual proof?"

      But according to you I don't need proof? You are contradicting yourself more and more by the comment; unhinged. If you agree with science then you will agree with it's application in verifying physical and biological evidence, right? The "mainstream" kind probably needs to get up to scratch with multiple forensic experts far advanced of their expertise, some of the best in the world I might add... I don't think waiting of scientific breakthroughs by scienific elite, only being credible once it's presented my a lesser majority is very good scientific logic, is it? Kind of flies in the face of every scientific breakthrough recorded, does it not? Something about "third grade"? I've gone to work compiling research that points to a genuine scientific basis in investing enthusiasm in a bipedal primate, and I might add it's not very hard to prove the evidence for that. The proof for Sasquatch, is still alluding me, unfortunately... That's unless you can fathom principles like Occam's Razor? Hair samples, casts... All this I can reference. I have no reason to show anyone gathering that data what better to do, I in fact celebrate their hard work by shoving it in people like yours' face. Science is what makes this thing real (or at least a bipedal primate) not me... It appears you don't like the messenger, sorry the truth hurts. Remember, it's the most ironic thing in the world that you are here, suggesting that others are insecure in what they stand by.

      Not very convincing.

      Delete
    28. Iktomi, I'm not going to read another one of your Books, read them before. Do you still require proof? Are you satisfied with your evidence? Do you care what others, mainstream science thinks about your evidence? Only you can answer these questions. What I think should only matter to me, like what you think matters to you. Understand? If your trying to make me accept your evidence as fact, try again. Get mainstream science to accept it and you'll find most all will agree. As far as the message? You mean, some people believe there is a huge unknown animal that few ever see and none can prove out in your back yard. I love it, it's cool, awesome, and unbelievable. It's great. But I won't be calling it real until the mainstream professionals make the call. The Messenger, well there are quite a few, many are so full of shit their heads may explode at any minute. Others, like DS for instance , that I actually admire for his bravery and individual perspective on the matter. And Even YOU sir for you enthusiasm for something unseen. So maybe you have it incorrect after all Iktomi. I simply can not agree with the primes that these pieces of the puzzle make it whole. There for I will keep my head until accepted proof is available, and you should not concern yourself with making me or anyone like me a believer. I will not concede, nor will you. If it is real, proof and the world will come some where behind it.

      Delete
    29. Sykes show, or should I say the Icon Film, Mark I am clueless Evans host was mostly a sham. Go read Meldrums remarks about it. He was to have seen all samples before they were submitted to Sykes, but that did not happen. He has stated he could have eliminated them all, but Hey they needed a show and they needed it now.
      Chuck

      Delete
    30. Well Chuck I can buy that theory because good TV is good TV, but remember just before the airing, when believers and all the hype was going the other way. I remember. I would believe Meldrum because, he states the evidence warrants a complete scientific evaluation. I've yet to hear him proclaim anything other than His own personal opinion. Not a Knower, he's a believer, he has no agenda other than where the work takes him.

      Delete
    31. Nice post 1236! It seems mainstream science will ever except it, or the gov will not allow it to come out. If I was a skeptic, it would seem weird to me that these DNA scientists, Melba, Sykes, etc, say they have the goods, and then it gets suppressed. Like Melba or not, she had the genome sequenced, but supposedly her idea of "Nephilium" was the reason it was rejected by peer review? That's not Scientific. Who cares what she believes, look at the DNA!?
      They say that recreational (Picnic-hike-camp-fish-boat-etc), is a trillion dollar a year industry, that would be greatly affected if BF was proven, maybe shut down. Forests would be protected = logging industry shuts down = no more new homes built, another trillion dollar industry affected. Hunting would also be affected, how many wives would not let their husbands/sons hunt anymore? The auto damage from deer, costs around 4 billion/year, that would quadruple if hunters were not hunting anymore.

      Delete
    32. Aaaaaargh, having a previous knowledge of my comments would explain why you are so seemingly so emotionally invested in me, rather than the evidence I present, which you appear to have not had the minerals to counter at any level at any stage of this comment section. Do I still require proof? Of course I do; as does any scientific arena, as does any researcher for their efforts. Am I satisfied with the evidence? I'm satisfied on what it points to. Do I care what mainstream science thinks about it? Why would the collective ignorance of others bother me when I have pioneering people enthusiastic? If MS was aware of the evidence, if MS took the time to analyse it and come to a conclusion contrary to mine, then it would... Because it can't present anything to show it's not what it is, I'm in fact very, very happy about it. What matters is getting something to support your stance against mine... Not forthcoming it seems. Complaining doesn't quite cut it in science. I'll do even better, I'll get experts far exceeding your MS to accept it, like any process of scientific output via a select few who are far more qualified than others... Are you aware of something caller peer review process? Doesn't your cherrished MS adhere to that? Double standard?? MS is both uninterested or restricted to invest any time in his field, it's rhetorical rubbish to claim they won't accept anything, dear boy. "Some people believe there is a huge unknown animal that few ever see and none can prove out in your back yard"... Yes, and they also happen to have conistent scientific method to support such a notion. This is what counts. You won't be calling it real until people with lesser qualifications adhere to it? I guess your standards aren't that spectacular after all. Maybe you can show me where I'm incorrect, Anon?

      And please... I couldn't care a less what you think; remember you are here, something you most humorously have avoided addressing right the way through this thread of comments?

      Very unconvincing.

      Delete
    33. I'm sorry. We're you saying something?

      Delete
    34. Oh Lord Iktomi, I'm here because it's what I want to do, simple. You have NO reason to Prove what you consider good strong evidence to me! As you can tell, I'm a regular fella, not a scientist, I just happen to believe them on certain matters of science. You accept you evidence for, I accept my evidence against. I don't care that you believe, good luck with it. I f I believed as strongly as you, I would fight the non believers with absolute FACTS. in this case their would be few more than what Meldrum has explained to which I agree to in theory. I will never concede an animal like this until I see or someone produces accepted scientific proof. You can change your mind or not, but I will not.

      Delete
    35. Everything we have is FACT...It just won't get recognized.

      Delete
  13. Looking forward to meet the team, that was hand picked for not knowing the capabilities of a paranormal Bigfoot? You have got to be kidding me. In the recent past, David Paulides assembled a team of the best of the best military people that he could find, in order to do the exact same thing that the Falcon Project's ground team thinks that they are going to do. And guess what happened? Paulides team failed miserably because what they attributed to the paranormal capabilities of the Bigfoot. Their failure was due to the very exact same thing that the Falcon Project team was hand picked to be as IGNORANT AS POSSIBLE IN. Furthermore, Barnes refused to bring Paulides on board as a consultant. So, is anybody taking bets on whether the Falcon Project will succeed at producing absolute proof? I didn't think so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What are you doing to help prove BF?

      Delete
    2. And such is your right. I like Paulides. I like everyone. Let me tell you something they did do. They got the funding. They brought in the technology and as a result they leveled the playing field on spotting and tracking. They put together an experienced and diversified team And they picked me. And just between you and I .....I'm your huckleberry. This is just my game.

      Delete
    3. Paulides Is a true investigator. He finds facts to promote,not theories. If he were to conclude the 100% fact of Sasquatch, I would believe whole hog. He has uncovered many truths and mysteries without allowing his personal views to take center stage. A great lesson.

      Delete
    4. For whom ? Those of us that already believe his work is legitimate required no such teaching. Here's a great lesson to me, the first person who gets a specimen or a solid DNA capture handling it the right way ab initio from the moment of contact. Be he a student driving home from Tacoma with a sturdy bumper or a pimp with a blimp. Secure your evidence as well as possible and get thee to a university lab with said specimen and have the news media meet you there. And I mean quick, "you gotta be cunning, and tell Ice Cube to leave the car running "

      Delete
    5. Bigfoot has already been proven to both the U.S. Government and the top U.S. scientists in the late 50's and 60's. You kids just weren't even born at the time, and therefore were ineligible to "get the memo". Consequently, there is no universal duty to "prove Bigfoot". Matter of fact, we have a choice to say, pursue communication, pursue recordings for personal mementos, pursue understanding or pursue personal experiences. Consequently, the attempt above to put persons on a guilt trip for not pursuing proof, is strictly mind games.

      Delete
    6. And who ask you for your obvious wagon full of made up Foolishness? Go to work, get a job, quite making things up. JOE IKTOMI, go find your APE Joe the knower.

      Delete
    7. Yes anon11:31 you have choices that you've hidden among all those made for TV facts you've spouted. So do we, we can point these non facts out, call you out when you misrepresent what has been proven, and has not. Playing a mind game with one such as Iktomi Joe is like playing monopoly without the board.

      Delete
    8. 11:35 I have a job. I manage property, both ranch and farms and livestock, over about 2000 or so acres with four employees. . And I love it. And the freedom that comes with it. And the overall reaction to what I do has been pretty positive. I can't help that it makes you angry. In many ways I'm sorry for you that it does. Your impact will be minimal, your commentary frivolous and self serving until you break off from the yoke of foolishness that's an earmark of your comment at 11:35 and save your vitriol for real attacks on the evidence the Falcon Project does or does not yield.

      Delete
    9. And that, as I previously stated has yet to be determined. Regardless I wish you well.

      Delete
    10. Hey Mike I have NO IDEA what it is you do. You may be the greatest person in the world, if so wonderful I celebrate you. If you wrote the post I refer to above, then you should expect someone to call your hand. I don't think you did, so I wonder why your involved in the response. Anyway sorry you were concerned, I will attack the project for what I think is a money making plot instead of real research, but hey I could be wrong Mike. If I am wrong I will own it without painting it pretty colors first, wrong is wrong. Good hunting Mike.

      Delete
    11. I have routinely asked the floor of anonymous posters to do exactly what you just did. "Get a haircut and get a real job" is the tool of the fake skeptic who cloaks himself in the guise of a cautious truth seeking healthy skeptic. You have just separated yourself from that herd and as a result your argument is all tne more persuasive and I apologize for my reactionary answer. What you say, Es Verdad!

      Delete
  14. Nothing completes a video about batsh!t crazy people like a Southern twang!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're a pickin....but I'm a grinning .....Yee Haw

      Delete
    2. And Joey Ikatomi is smoldering! OMG, what an ass pounding! Joey THE KNOWER!

      Delete
    3. wez bein po folk heers caws we needin jobs ans educayshun fer shure

      Delete
    4. I call LAST POST-- if you post below this you will suffer the BFE curse of circular reasoning and paranoia and ultimately end up wearing a Tin Foil Hat!

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?